On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:09:24AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Can someone remind me again why we can't have GPL DLLs in the tree? Doesn't the "call through documented interface blah blah blah not derived work" argument cause the license for each two DLLs in Wine to be independant?
Basically it goes like this: LGPLed code can be run as a library, i.e. a function of an LGPLed dll can be called as a function call. GPLed code must be run as a (Unix) process if you want to use it from non-GPL-compatible code. See the GPL and especially the GPL FAQ for details.
Ciao Jörg
Joerg Mayer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:09:24AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Can someone remind me again why we can't have GPL DLLs in the tree? Doesn't the "call through documented interface blah blah blah not derived work" argument cause the license for each two DLLs in Wine to be independant?
Basically it goes like this: LGPLed code can be run as a library, i.e. a function of an LGPLed dll can be called as a function call. GPLed code must be run as a (Unix) process if you want to use it from non-GPL-compatible code. See the GPL and especially the GPL FAQ for details.
Ciao Jörg
Hmm. All I could find about it is at http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation. They do suggest that. However, as that point says so well, they are not to judge.
I'll give a counter pointer, but not go into the discussion. I think it's unsuitable for wine-devel, and wine-license is dead. Anyone interested in continuing this discussion - please email me privately. I'll be happy to cross CC everyone who do.
The counter pointer - http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6366
Shachar
-
Joerg Mayer -
Shachar Shemesh